HIGHLIGHT

Once again Science has rejected a Technical Comment on its high-profile iPS publication. Amazingly, Science rejected this Technical Comment based on its lacking of novelty. Then why would Science continue to publish iPS cell research suffering the same old problems? Close examination of two reports- submitted on significantly different dates, but simultaneously printed- on iPS cells made by using “non-integrating ” virus or without virus revealed some interesting aspects. Questions have been raised regarding the validity of some conclusions claimed in these new studies. Strong arguments are now presented to support the conclusion that iPS cells receiving and expressing oncogenes are incorrectly programmed stem (iPS) cells. These cells, similar to previously reported alike cells, are hard to be rendered cancer-free and may pose heavy risks in their therapeutic use for regenerative medicine